Green Behaviour

8/10/2019 Green Behaviour

1/11

FUTURE BRIEF:

Green Behaviour

October 2012Issue 4

Environment

Science for Environment Policy


2/11

1.0Introduction and background

Green BehaviourIt is recognised that the sum o our individual or household behaviours has a substantial impact on the environment.

However, it is difficult or citizens to relate personal consumption and behaviour to large-scale problems such as climate

change, pollution, biodiversity loss and natural resource depletion. Even i we express environmental concern and awareness,

this most ofen does not translate into behaviour (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002).

Pro-environmental or green behaviour is behaviour that

minimises harm to the environment as much as possible,or even benefits it (Steg & Vlek, 2009). Examples

include minimising energy use, and reducing waste.

More simply, it has been described as doing good and

avoiding bad (Cushman-Roisin, 2012).

Tis Future Brief from Science for Environment Policy

outlines the current scientific theory, thinking and

research in the field of green behaviour. Alongside this, it

explores the opportunities and challenges in developing

policy to support and encourage green behaviour and

suggest avenues for future research.

1.1 Role of Policy

Policy has a role in supporting and encouraging green

behaviour (Lehner et al., 2011), but gauging the level

and form of intervention is complex since behaviour

is influenced by many factors (Jackson, 2005). Green

behaviour is the shared responsibility of individual

citizens, public authorities and industry (Sonigo et al.,2012) and policy can provide a framework within which

business and citizens can operate with less detriment to

the environment (EEA, 2005).

Green behaviour is inherent in several EU policy

initiatives, such as the 2008 EU Sustainable

Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial

Policy Action Plan, which is due for review this year.

Under the existing action plan, several EU policies have

been revised, such as the Eco-design Directive and the

EU Eco-label. Green behaviour will also be linked to

the Resource Efficiency flagship initiative as part of the

Europe 2020 strategy.

1.2ypes of policy tools

Sonigo et al. (2012) have identified four main categories

of policy tool that can be used to encourage green

Box 1: The impact of individual andhousehold behaviours

In 2002, the EU-25 contained 7%of the worlds population and itsconsumption generated 17% of theworlds ecological footprint. (EuropeanCommission, 2008) .

Households are one of the largest finalenergy users in the EU, accounting for26.2% of total energy consumptionin 2001 (Eurostat, 2005). In 2002,

households contributed 10% of CO2emissions in the EU-15 (EEA, 2004a).

Modes of transport have become moreenergy-efficient in the EU, but this isoutweighed by growth in transportdemand, resulting in a net increase ofabout 20% in GHG emissions over the

past decade (EEA, 2004b).


3/11

3

behaviour:

Regulatory this includes mandatory tools that ban or limit

certain products or behaviour, and requirements, such as

mandatory labelling. Economic market-based instruments that influence purchasing

decisions through taxes, incentives, subsidies, penalties or grants

for green enterprises.

Information such as product labels and information on energy

bills.

Behavioural tools or nudges aimed at influencing consumer

behaviour by leading individuals to make choices that are better

for the environment.

Tere is increasing policy interest in behavioural tools or nudges which

are perceived as less paternalistic, so increasing public acceptance

and lessening the administrative and regulatory burden (Taler &

Sustein, 2008). Successful examples are comparative information on

energy bills, pledges to perform certain behaviours and defaults for

pro-environmental alternatives, such as paperless billing, (Oullier &

Saunero, 2011). However, other forms of policy tool are influential and

may be more appropriate in certain contexts. As such, it is important

that initiatives are evidence-based to ensure they encourage the desired

behaviour and minimise unintended or rebound effects (Maxwell et al.,

2011).

2.0 Theoretical underpinning

to green behaviour promotion2.1 Neoclassical economic theory

Microeconomics is the study of decision-making processes of individuals

and organisations and, for most of the 20thcentury, was underpinned

by neoclassical economic theory. Tis has three broad assumptions:

individuals have rational preferences, they maximise outcomes and

they act independently on the basis of full information. Tis view also

implies behaviour is the result of conscious deliberative thought and

that education would result in more pro-environmental behaviour

(Kollman & Agyeman, 2002).

G R E E N B E H A V I O U R

2.2 Bounded rationality

During the latter half of the 20th century, evidence emerged to suggest

that human behaviour is often irrational. o address this, economics

integrated insights from psychology with economic theory, resultingin a new sub-discipline called behavioural economics, which explains

why decisions may not be rational. Simon (1955) introduced the notion

of bounded rationality, which proposes that rational decision-making

is often limited by availability or time, or in some cases, too much

choice which leads to procrastination (Schwartz, 2004). Tis paradox

of choice can be heightened by the complexity of green behaviour, for

example, it is difficult for consumers to decide whether non-organic,

locally-produced food is more sustainable than organic food that has

been transported long distances (Sderholm, 2010).

2.3 Mental shortcuts and heuristics

Our limits to rationality can be described by judgement heuristics ormental shortcuts. Some common examples are described in Box 2.

2.4 Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort caused by inconsistency or

conflict between two or more attitudes, beliefs or actions. For example,

we may have an attachment to the freedom of driving, alongside

a concern for the environment. People are motivated to reduce this

discomfort by altering existing attitudes and beliefs, or by adding new

ones to create a consistent belief system. For example, someone may

reassess the freedom they gain from driving because of congestion and

parking problems. Behaviour change can work on cognitive dissonance

by asking people to voice their beliefs and set them against their

behaviour.

2.5 Norms

Norms are important influences on decision-making. Social norms

have been called the grammar of society (Biccheri, 2006) and are

collectively agreed rules about how to behave. On the other hand,

personal norms are our own expectations of how we should behave

based on our internal values (Schwartz, 1968) and independent of

others views (Bicchieri, 2006). A person who follows personal norms

will be more resistant to social influence than a person who follows

social norms (Bicchieri, 2010).

Box 2: Limits to rationalitySome common examples of judgement heuristics, which can be thought of as mental shortcuts that limit our rationality, include:

Anchoring.Te tendency to rely too heavily, or anchor, on one trait or piece of information. Tis can lead to branded or well-

known products being chosen over newer, environmentally-friendly products.

Loss aversion. Te tendency for people to be more reluctant to give something up than they are to be content with gain. For

example, a 5% tax on environmentally-harmful products will have more impact on behaviour than an incentive of the same value

to buy an environmentally-beneficial product. It can also produce a reluctance to give up old products, such as inefficient cars and

washing-machines (Mudgal et al., 2011).

Te status quo bias. Tis suggests we prefer familiar situations. Tis is one of the reasons that the default option is a powerful

policy tool. For example, defaults on computers to double-sided printing and by utility companies to receiving paperless bills have

proved effective (Oullier & Saunero, 2011).

Emotions can also limit rational decision-making (Savage et al., 2011).Weoften build emotional relationships with behaviours and objects.

For example, our emotional attachment to possessing the most up-to-date mobile phone can mean we ignore replacement costs as it is more

important to own the newest model.


4/11

4

Market norms(Heyman & Ariely, 2004) influence behaviour through

the assessment of costs and benefits. Introducing market norms into

a context usually governed by social or personal norms can cause a

crowding out effect and actually de-incentivise a desired behaviour.For example, financially rewarding recycling can de-incentivise the

behaviour because the initial motivation is based on civic duty and not

individual gain (Sderholm, 2010).

2.6 Sociological theories

Sociological theories focus on the structure surrounding the individual,

rather than the individual themselves. Tey suggest that people are

locked in to patterns of behaviour by their physical, economic or social

conditions. For example, the availability of recycling facilities, the quality

of public transport, house prices and economic conditions all affect

behaviour.

Although the responsibility of the individual must not be diminished,

it is important to recognise the influence of situational factors (Hines

et al.,1986, Steg & Vlek, 2009) and policy has a role in ensuring the

appropriate infrastructure allows behavioural change.

At a more conceptual level, Welzer (2011) proposes that our external

economic infrastructure shapes our mental infrastructure and societys

preoccupation with economic growth is reflected in our need for constant

individual advancement, which does not promote green behaviour.

2.7 ransition theories

Whilst behavioural theories tend to focus on a single point in time,

transition theories are focused on the process of change (Prochaska

& DiClemente, 1982). Tis highlights periods of transition, such as

starting university, changing job, or retiring, where behaviours come

under scrutiny.

Policy initiatives to promote green behaviour could tap into the more

predictable moments of

change, such as moving

house or having a child

(Schfer et al., 2012). Tese

theories may inform the

potential of using more

collective moments ofchange that represent a

window of opportunity

for policymakers. For

example, in the UK public

resentment against four-

wheel drive vehicles (4x4s)

in urban areas enabled the

introduction of taxes for

these larger vehicles.

2.8 Multi-dimensional

modelsConsidering all the relevant

theories, the promotion of

green behaviour will require

a multi-dimensional view

(Jackson, 2005). Kollmuss

& Agyeman (2002) have identified the factors important in green

behaviour as falling under three headings: demographics, external

factors and internal factors (see Fig. 1).

External factors include infrastructure, economic, social and cultural

factors. Internal factors include motivation, environmental knowledge,

values, attitudes, environmental awareness and perception of control.

2.9 Social practice models

Shove (2010) argues that merely placing driving factors, such as value

systems and infrastructure, into basic causal models does not do

justice to the complexity of sustainable behaviour. She suggests a more

dynamic approach that considers citizens as part of the infrastructure

and instrumental in creating values, rather than simply being subject to

them. Her Tree Elements model outlines the importance of:

Materials, which consist of the physical objects that permit

or facilitate green behaviour to be performed, such as

recycling boxes or energy monitors.

Meanings, which are images or interpretations associated

with behaviours that affect their performance. For example,

cycling in some parts of Europe is considered to be a sports

activity rather than a convenient mode of commuting,

which influences the groups that take up cycling.

Procedures, which are the skills or competencies that

permit or encourage the behaviour, such as knowledge

about reducing energy use. Tis also includes legislative

frameworks and policy initiatives, such as EU energy

labelling or building standards.

Although the academic debate between the more individualistic

behavioural economics models and social practice models (Shove,


Figure 1: Model of pro-environmental behaviour (Adapted from Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002)


5/11

5G R E E N B E H A V I O U R

2010; Whitmarsh et al., 2011; Shove, 2011) is

ongoing, one approach does not have to be taken at

the expense of the other.

Instead, acknowledging the contribution from various

disciplines (Wilson & Chatterton, 2011) can help

green behaviour initiatives to work at multi levels with

appropriate techniques, whether they are financial

incentives, regulation or encouraging community

transition.

3.0 Practicalframeworks to informpolicy

In order to apply theories within a policy context

it is helpful to incorporate them into a pragmatic

framework (Chatterton, 2011; Dolan et al., 2010). A number of these

frameworks have been developed, mostly on a national level and within

certain policy sectors such as transport or energy.

3.1 Defras UK Sustainable Development Strategy

Tis outlined the 4 Es model of behaviour change to assist the UK

government to develop strategies that enable more sustainable living in

homes and communities (Defra, 2005) (see Fig. 2).

Later, in its framework for pro-environmental behaviours, Defra (2008)

suggested that different combinations of these tools should be applied

to different population segments that vary according to environmental

awareness and commitment, such as deep greens versus those who are

honestly unengaged in green behaviour.

3.2 Te Four As

Tis approach is rooted in social marketing and identifies the Four As

which focus on the necessary conditions to improve green consumption

and behaviour:

Accessibility green products and services must be

available, which may also include phasing out of products

that are harmful to the environment.

Affordability sustainable consumption must be affordable

for everyone, especially low-income households.

Attractiveness sustainable consumption needs to be seen

as pleasant with clear personal benefits, such as improved

health and better quality of life.

Awareness sustainable consumption requires a level of

environmental knowledge, for example, gained through

information pamphlets and education schemes.

An approach similar to the Four As has been adopted by the

international company Unilever (2011) in its five levers of behaviour

change, which propose that the desired behaviour must be made

understood, easy, rewarding, desirable and habitual.

3.3 Nudge and think

John et al.(2009) differentiate between nudge and think strategies.

Nudge philosophy assumes citizens use mental shortcuts and proposes

policymakers should customise messages to these biases.

In comparison, think strategies hold that citizens should have a more

meaningful influence on political decisions through participative

means, such as citizens assemblies and online forums. In the case of

think strategies, the policymakers role is to create institutional spaces

that support citizen participation.

John et al. (2009) suggest that policy can benefit from both nudge

and think. For example, think strategies could help identify and

legitimise nudge strategies and nudging may encourage participation

in think strategies.

3.4 Four dimensions of behaviour change

Chatterton (2011) proposes a framework that recognises the need

for multiple models and aims to help policymakers select modelsthat work best in different contexts. Based on work conducted in the

UK to reduce household energy use, it encourages policymakers to

identify the desired behaviour along four dimensions:

Te actorsof the relevant behaviour these range from self-

determined individuals to communities or populations.

Te scopes these range from isolated behaviours, such as

car-free days, to lifestyles, such as complete self-sufficiency.

Te durabilities these range from one-off behaviours,

such as loft insulation, to enduring behaviours, such as

routinely switching off lights.

Te domains of relevant behaviour this refers to thetarget for change and ranges from the psychological (the

way people think or make decisions) to the infrastructural

(energy, transport and economic systems). It also refers

to the scale at which the change occurs in terms of

social,national, or global levels.

Figure 2: Changing behaviour through policymaking (Defra, 2005)


6/11


contexts (e.g. housing, monetary and transportation policies) that

directly or indirectly influence daily household behaviour. For

example, the building of new roads and car parks indirectly promotes

car travel despite governments attempts to reduce car use. Conflictingmessages can impede green behaviour initiatives.

4.3 Reviews of case studies

Southerton et al.(2011) reviewed 30 case studies of green behaviour

change initiatives and examined six of the most successful in depth.

Tey noted that the majority of schemes focused on the individual

context (50% of European cases), mainly via informational and

marketing campaigns and sometimes incentives. Tis is similar to

Shoves (2003) observations that policy tends to focus on financial

or informational measures. Shove argues that this is due to the

dominance of economics in policymaking and the need to make

complex issues more manageable so that policy can address thempractically.

Osbaldiston & Schott (2012) conducted an international analysis of

experimental research that measures green behaviour in real-world

settings. Teir analysis indicated the most effective treatments use

cognitive dissonance, goal setting, prompts or reminders and social

modelling, which involves passing information via demonstration

or discussion with others. In comparison, feedback and instructions

had less impact.

Some treatments seem more effective for certain behaviours.

For example, social modelling and commitment are effective for

promoting home energy conservation, whilst techniques that increase

convenience appear better for recycling. Osbaldiston & Schott (2012)

called for more integrated sets of tools that complement each other

and target multiple contexts. For example, a water-saving initiative

in Canada involved face-to-face information campaigns alongside

technology to monitor water and pledges from consumers for

reductions in water consumption. Tis resulted in a 17% reduction

in peak water use.

Te project Policies to encourage sustainable consumption (Sonigo

et al., 2012) reviewed 15 case studies. It suggested that, when

designing tools that affect prices, there should be a consideration

of possible rebound effects on environmental benefits. For example,the French government introduced its bonus-malus system, which

involves subsidising the purchase of environmentally-friendly cars

whilst funding these subsidies with a tax on high emission cars. In

2009, it was estimated that the system had averted 3 million tons

of CO2,but there had also been some rebound effects, with people

driving more efficient cars greater distances.

4.4 More systematic monitoring

Numerous sources have recommended more systematic monitoring

of behaviour initiatives (Osbaldiston & Schott, 2012; Southerton

et al., 2011). Tere is a need to identify which components are

most important for particular outcomes. Noteworthy attempts inthis direction already exist, in particular, the UK Governments

Behavioural Insights eam trial initiatives to inform a household

energy efficiency programme (see Box 3).

rials can help identify possible rebound effects and methods

Once this is done, the appropriate model can be applied. For example,

rational economics would work best with more individual, isolated,

one-off behaviours, whilst a social practices approach would be best

for community level behaviour that aims to endure.

Chatterton (2011) suggests the framework provides a starting point

for policymakers to think about behaviours and consider which

models may be applicable in a given situation.

4.0 Research and evaluationof interventions

Research on green behaviour uses both correlational and experimentalmethods (Osbaldiston & Schott, 2012). Correlational methods

use surveys to collect data, asking participants about psychological

processes, such as social norms, values and identity. Experimental

methods examine interventions by manipulating factors that are

thought to encourage green behaviour.

4.1 OECD review and survey

Te OECD has reviewed evidence on the effects of policy

instruments on household behaviour (OECD, 2008) and on the

basis of this conducted a survey of household consumption patterns

and behaviour (OECD, 2011). Its survey of 10,000 households in

ten OECD countries indicated that certain interventions were better

suited to certain behaviour changes. Price-based incentives are more

appropriate for encouraging energy and water saving, as well as

reducing waste. For example, households charged for water consume

20% less than houses that are not charged.

Te review and survey also identified a number of important

infrastructural factors. For example, there are split incentives for

landlords and tenants to insulate houses: landlords do not benefit

from insulation as they do not pay energy bills, and tenants are not

motivated to invest in a house they do not own.

Te survey also recognised variation in the impacts of certain policies

on different groups. For example, it appears that informationcampaigns to modify transport choices would be most effective if

targeted at groups with higher car use, such as men, the middle aged

and those with higher income. In addition, policies to encourage

green behaviour may have negative distributional effects, particularly

with respect to water charges, which are more likely to adversely

affect low-income households.

4.2 Swedish SHARP programme

Te SHARP programme in Sweden on environmental household

behaviour (Sderholm, 2010) also found divisions of responsibility

in consumer segments, noticeably along the lines of gender. Results

indicated that men tend to make more decisions about home energy

systems and personal transport, whilst women are more instrumental

in green behaviours concerning food, such as buying organic

products.

Sderholms (2010) research highlights the role of other policy

6


7/11


to counteract them. For example, the American energy company

OPower conducted a trial of 1000 households, providing them

with comparative data on energy consumption and that of their

local neighbourhood. Tis green nudge reduced energy use inhouseholds with high consumption, but increased energy use in low

consumption households as they appeared to feel justified to use

more. However, this rebound effect was rectified by using expressions

of social approval (a smiling face) or disapproval (a frowning face),

for decreases and increases in energy use respectively.

Mudgal et al. (2011) call for more interdisciplinary research

programmes, rather than programmes that focus on just one

area, such as transport or energy, and for more retailer-academic

collaboration, as exemplified in some work of the UK Behavioural

Insights eam.

Cross-cultural research could provide insights into why certain

behaviours are easier to encourage in certain contexts, whilst

Shove (2010) suggests more holistic investigation into how to

align appropriate infrastructure with the influence of norms and

environmental awareness.

5.0 Policy Implications5.1 Bundles of tools

Tere is strong evidence-based support for the use of a mixture orbundles of tools to encourage green behaviour (Sonigo et al., 2012;

OECD, 2011). Combinations of push and pull strategies may be

useful, and this could also include choice-editing, i.e. the removal of

unsustainable choices (Defra, 2008).

However, alongside this there is a need for awareness of how tools

interact, as there may be possible rebound effects. Tus, more

efficient vehicles may lead to an increase in driving distances or

better insulation could lead to an increase in home energy use. Teremay be also adverse distributional effects, for example, when low-

income households suffer from water charges.

5.2 Supply and demand, and new business models

Policy needs to work with the supply side of industry and business,

as well as consumers, to improve the environmental performance of

products, stimulate the demand for better products and technologies,

and help consumers make better choices.

With current business models there are several lock-ins, whereby

consumers do not choose environmentally better products, so

companies do not invest in product design to reduce negativeenvironmental impacts. Innovative new business models need

to break these vicious circles between supply and demand. For

example, clothes stores can be encouraged to set up second-hand

outlets to re-sell their own products, which have been bought back

from customers. Tis would encourage recycling of clothes and

brand loyalty, but also the design of more durable clothing.

Different groups in the population have different approaches and

stakes in sustainability. Existing research has indicated a potential

in targeting initiatives for certain segments of the consumer

population, which can be defined socio-demographically by income

and gender (OECD, 2011; Sderholm, 2010), or by commitment

to environmental issues (Defra, 2011). More research is needed to

inform effective targeting of green behaviour initiatives.

5.3 Role of values

When implementing behavioural tools it is important to recognise

the influence of values (most prominently we-centred vs. I-centred

values) and cultural change (Lehner et al., 2011; Crompton, 2010;

Welzer, 2011). Further encouragement of we-centred values is

necessary, but also a cultural revaluing of certain behaviours. For

example, a greater value could be placed on working from home

rather than commuting to work.

De Groot & Steg (2009) suggest that if policy intends to workon egoistic or I-centred values then it should always be linked to

altruistic (we-centred) and biospheric (environment-centred) values

to produce stable pro-environmental behaviour. Tis will depend on

the reversibility of behaviour. For example, loft insulation is difficult

to reverse so, in this case, appealing to I-centred values with financial

incentives could be productive. However, transport choice is easier to

reverse so, in this case, interventions may need to appeal to altruistic

and biospheric values to produce stable behaviour change.

In some cases it may prove successful to appeal to values indirectly.

For example, durable goods are appealing because consumers associate

them with quality, and not because it means the products last longer.

In this instance, it may be better to appeal to the value of quality to

encourage consumers to buy longer-lasting goods.

5.4 Greater variation in types of intervention

Until recently, the focus in behavioural change initiatives has been on

Box 3: Green behaviour trials in the UK

Te UK Governments Behavioural Insights eam are conductingtrials to research the impacts of incentives designed to encouragegreen behaviour. Tese are:

1. A trial totest the impacts of incentives to encourage uptake

of energy efficiency products. Tis compares individual

incentives, such as vouchers for home products, with

collective incentives, such as a 25% discount when five

households purchase energy efficiency products together.

2. A trial to test the impact of removing barriers to change

by offering a free loft-clearing service to enable insulation.

Preliminary results indicate that this service has increased

uptake by about 2.89%, whereas financial incentives have

not increased uptake (Haynes, 2012).

3. A trial to examine how behavioural feedback can helpconsumers save energy through comparisons to others

energy use. Preliminary results indicate this has produced

between 1 and 2% reduction in energy use, mainly based

on social comparison (Haynes, 2012).

77


8/11

fiscal incentives and information campaigns (Jackson, 2005; Shove,

2003; Southerton et al., 2011). Little focus has been on facilitating

conditions and encouraging community and business initiatives.

Some potentially effective solutions on this level are deliberative andinclusionary procedures (DIPs), which include citizens juries and

round tables (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002), or the social modelling

interventions identified by Osbaldiston & Schott (2012) (see Section

4.3). Tese are also acknowledged by John et al. (2009) to promote

deliberative thinking and more stable behaviour conversion.

Tis again emphasises the need to understand how values interact. For

example, is it possible to convert short-term behavioural nudges into

long-term deeper value change? Shove (2003) suggests that by focusing

on individual behaviour, policymakers cannot influence longer-term

transformations of technology, culture and practice. Southertonet al.

(2011) question whether it is best to focus on incremental changesthat are less disruptive, or to overhaul existing practices, which may

produce greater reductions in environmental damage but require longer

timescales.

Indeed, it could be argued that certain initiatives may encourage

I-centred values, for example, financial incentives may collude with

consumerist and materialistic values. However, if implemented

correctly, financial incentives and nudges could have a deeper influence

by working at several levels. For example, lowering taxes on the labour

to repair electrical products could promote greater levels of repair, as

well as encourage the design and value of more reparable goods.

In addition, with the advent of smart technology, it may be possibleto take the individual out of habitual loop and automate decision

processes, for example, master switches can be introduced which

automatically turn off all lights and put appliances on standby when a

person leaves their house (Haynes, 2012). However, this has social and

ethical implications in terms of personal choice.

5.5 Collaboration vs. Intervention

It is valuable to use a bottom-up and collaborative approach to

behavioural change initiatives, as has been done by the Middelgrunden

Wind Cooperative in Copenhagen, whose wind farm has produced an

estimated annual reduction in CO2emissions of 81,000 tons. However,

there may be a need for policy interventions to break down locked-in

behaviour or kick-start green behaviour. Tis may be financial through

taxes, penalties and grants, for example, in the Middelgrunden Wind

Cooperative, the Danish government provided financial incentives

through tax breaks on dividends and by setting a guaranteed price for

the renewable electricity produced.

Other policy interventions could involve product standards and

building standards or mandates on guarantee lengths and lifetimes

to increase durability of products. Tey could also involve the use of

media standards and marketing standards (Jackson, 2005) by ensuring

products are not misrepresented as environmental through clever

phrasing and imagery.

5.6 Policy framing

Te framing of policy is important (Crompton, 2010; Mudgal et

al., 2011). Despite a reluctance to be interventionist, policy is never

neutral but shapes our thinking (Jackson, 2005). For example, targets

on greenhouse gas reductions can communicate the seriousness of the

environmental issue and Jnicke (2011, 2012) has shown that countries

with low environmental targets often do not reach them, whereas those

with higher achievable targets tend to surpass them.

o be successful, policy needs an appropriate context and consistency

(Jackson, 2005). It should minimise conflicts with other initiatives,

for example, the UKs car-scrapping scheme, which offers motorists a

discount on new vehicles if they trade in their old vehicle (intended

to revitalise the motor industry), could appear to be in conflict with

the promotion of durable products. Sustainable consumption needs to

be more mainstreamed into other policies and also into politics. Tis

includes consistency with the behaviour of government, which can

lead by example with environmental behaviour in its own offices and

through green procurement.

Sustainable consumption needs to be reframed so it is notviewed as

a sacrifice or reverse route from previous lifestyle progress, but as a

progressive route in itself (Sonigo et al., 2012). Social marketing has a

role to play in improving the image of green behaviour, as well as in the

recognition of consumer segments.

5.7 Striking a balance

Promoting green behaviour is a complex task. It involves tapping into

habitual and deliberative processes at individual, household and social

levels, and working within the triangle of government, business and

consumer. In addition, it can be prone to unintended or rebound

effects. As such, it will require multifaceted and adaptable initiativeswith a sound evidence base in economic, psychological and social

sciences. Tis does not require an integration of these disciplines, but an

appropriate application of their different models (Wilson & Chatterton,

2011). Policymakers will need to strike a balance between including the

increasing range of scientific and theoretical insights whilst maintaining

a practical approach that is transparent to stakeholders.

Implementing green behaviour initiatives will also require policy to

walk a strategic line between encouraging and enforcing, which will

involve working closely with a range of actors and an awareness of

moments of change to strike the right balance. Evaluation and feedback

will be needed to ensure adaptation throughout the development of

initiatives. Complex tasks may require complex solutions and produce

complex results, but this should not deter the development of innovative

methods and evaluations.


8


9/11

ReferencesBicchieri, C. (2006) Te Grammar of Society: the Nature and Dynamics

of Social Norms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bicchieri, C. (2010) Norms, preferences, and conditional behavior.

Politics, Philosophy & Economics9(3): 297313.

Chatterton, . (2011) An Introduction to Tinking about Energy

Behaviour: a multi-model approach. London: DECC. Available at:

http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/about-us/economics-social-

research/3887-intro-thinking-energy-behaviours-pdf

Crompton, . (2010) Te Common Cause: the case for working with our

cultural values. Godalming: WWF-UK. Available at: http://assets.wwf.

org.uk/downloads/common_cause_report.pdf

Cushman-Roisin, B. (2012) Green behaviour (homo ecologicus). [Pre-

sentation] Available at: http://engineering.dartmouth.edu/~cushman/

courses/engs44/GreenBehavior.pdf

Darnton, A., Elster-Jones, J., Lucas, K. & Brooks, M. (2006) Promo-

ting Pro-environmental behaviour: existing evidence to inform better policy

making. London: Defra. Available at: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Docu-

ment.aspx?Document=SD14002_3822_FRP.pdf

De Groot & Steg (2009) Mean or Green: which values can promote

stable pro-environmental behaviour? Conservation Letters. 2(2):61-66.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) (2005)

Securing the Future: delivering UK Sustainable Development Strategy.

London: Defra. Available at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/

pb10589-securing-the-future-050307.pdf

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) (2008)

A framework for pro-environmental behaviours.London: Defra. Available

at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13574-behaviours-re-

port-080110.pdf

Dolan, P. Hallsworth, M., Halpern, D., King, D. & Vlaev, I. (2010)

Mindspace: Influencing behaviour through public policy. London: UKCabinet Office Institute for Government.

European Commission (2008) Environment Fact Sheet: Sustainable

Consumption & Production: a challenge for us all. Luxembourg : Office

for Official Publications of the European Communities. Available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/pdf/brochure.pdf

European Commission (2009) Smarter and Cleaner: Consuming and pro-

ducing sustainable[leaflet]. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications

of the European Communities. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/envi-

ronment/eussd/pdf/brochure_scp.pdf

European Environment Agency (2004a)Analysis of greenhouse gas emis-

sion trends and projections in Europe 2004. Luxembourg: Office for Offi-

cial Publications of the European Communities. Available at: http://

www.eea.europa.eu/publications/technical_report_2004_7

European Environment Agency (2004b): en key transport and envi-

ronment issues for policy-makers, ERM 2004 Indicators trackingtransport and environment integration in the EU. Luxembourg: Office

for Official Publications of the European Communities. Available at:

http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/ERM2004.

European Environment Agency (2005) Household Consumption and

the Environment.Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the

European Communities. Available at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/pu-

blications/eea_report_2005_11

Eurostat (2004) Eurostat Yearbook 2004 Statistical Guide to Europe.

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communi-

ties. Available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/IY_OFF-PUB/KS-CD-04-001/EN/KS-CD-04-001-EN.PDF

Haynes, L. from UK Behavioural Insights eam. (2012)Applying beha-

vioural insights to environmental policy. DG SANCO & DG ENVI-

RONMEN workshop on application of behavioural insights to envi-

ronmental policy: From Behaviour to Environmental Policy and vice

versa.

Heyman, J. & Ariely, D. (2004) Effort for Payment. Psychological

Science. 15(11):787- 793.

Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R. & omera, A. N. (1986). Analysis

and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: ameta-analysis.Journal of Environmental Education. 18(2): 1-8.

Jackson, . (2005) Motivating Sustainable Consumption: a review of

evidence on consumer behaviour and behavioural change. London: Sus-

tainable Development Research Network. Available at: http://www.

sd-research.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/motivatingscfinal_000.pdf

Jnicke, M. (2011) Green growth: From a growing eco-in-

dustry to economic sustainability. Energy Policy. 48:13-21.

Jnicke, M. (2012) Dynamic governance of clean-energy markets: how

technical innovation could accelerate climate policies.Journal of Clea-ner Production. 22: 50 -59

John, P., Smith, G & Stoker, G. (2009) Nudge nudge, Tink think:

wo strategies for changing civic behaviour. Te Political Quarterly.

80(3): 361-370.

Kollmuss, A. & Agyeman, J. (2002) Mind the Gap: Why do people

act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro- environmental

behavior? Environmental Education Research8:3, 239-260

Lehner, M., Popwer, K., & Mont, O. (2011). Public perceptions and

values and perceptions of importance for Sustainable Consumption po-

licy? In: Sustainable Consumption Conference 2011 Sustainable

Consumption owards Action and Impact. Hamburg, Germany,

November 6-8 2011.

Maxwell, D., Owen, P., McAndrew. L, Muehmel, K., Neu-


9


10/11

bauer, A., (2011) Addressing the Rebound Effect. A report for

the European Commission DG Environment, 26 April 2011.

Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/pdf/rebound_ef-

fect_report.pdf

Mudgal, S., Bain, J., Kong, M.A. et al. (2011) Expanding the Evidence

Base for the Design of Policy Influencing Consumer Choice for Products

and Services with Environmental Impacts. Policy briefing for the Euro-

pean Commission DG Environment, June 2011. Available at: http://

ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/impact_studies/pdf/Consumer_

choice_Policybrief.pdf

Oullier, O & Saunero, S. (2011). Policy Brief 216 : Green new incen-

tives for ecological behaviour.Paris: Centre for Strategic Analysis (Centre

danalyse strategique). Available at: http://www.strategie.gouv.fr/en/

content/policy-brief-216-nudges-green-new-incentives-green-beha-vior-march-2011

OECD (2008) Household Behaviour and the Environment: Reviewing

the Evidence. Paris: OECD. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/green-

growth/consumptioninnovationandtheenvironment/42183878.pdf

OECD (2011) Greening Household Behaviour: Te Role of Public Policy.

Paris: OECD Publishing. Doi: 10.1787/9789264096875-en.

Osbaldiston, R. & Schott, J.P. (2012) Environmental Sustainability

and Behavioral Science: Meta-Analysis of Proenvironmental Behavior

Experiments. Environment and Behavior. 44 (2) :247-299.

Prochaska J.O. & DiClemente C.C. (1982). rans-theoretical therapy

- toward a more integrative model of change. Psychotherapy: Teory,

Research and Practice.19(3):276-288.

Savage, B., Knight, ., Bacon, J., Millington, A., Bullock, H. &

Buckland, J. (2011) Behavioural Insights oolkit. London: Department

for ransport. Available at: http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/beha-

vioural-insights-toolkit/toolkit.pdf

Schfer, M. , Jaeger-Erben, M. and Bamberg, S. (2012) Life Events

as Windows of Opportunity for Changing towards Sustainable

Consumption Patterns?Journal of Consumer Policy. 35:65-84.

Schwartz, S.H. (1968). Words, deeds, and the perception of

consequences and responsibility in action situations. Journal of Perso-

nality and Social Psychology. 10:232-242.

Schwartz, B. (2004) Te Paradox of Choice: Why more is less? New York:

Harper Collins.

Shove, E. (2005) Changing human behaviour and lifestyle: A chalsus-

tainable consumption? In: ed. I.Ropke ; L.Reisch 2005Consumption-

Perspectives from ecological economics. Cheltenham: Elgar. pp111-132.

Shove, E. (2010) Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories

of social change. Environment and Planning A. 42:1273-1285.

Shove, E. (2011) On the difference between chalk and cheese - a res-

ponse to Whitmarsh et als comments on ``Beyond the ABC: climate

change policy and theories of social change Environment and Planning

A. 43:262-264.

Simon, H. (1955). A Behavioural Model of Ratio-nal Choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 69: 99-118.

Sderholm, P. (2010) Environmental Policy and Household Beha-

viour: Sustainability and Everyday Life. Washington DC: Earthscan.

Sonigo et al (2012) Policies to encourage sustainable consump-

tion, Final report prepared by BIO Intelligence Service for

European Commission (DG ENV). Available at: http://

ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/pdf/report_22082012.pdf

Southerton, D., McMeekin, A. & Evans, D. (2011) International

Review of Behaviour Change Initiatives: Climate Change BehavioursResearch Programme. Scottish Government Social Research. Available

at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/340440/0112767.pdf

Steg & Vlek (2009) Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour.Jour-

nal of Environmental Psychology. 29: 309-317.

Taler, R.H & Sustein, C.R. (2008) Nudge: Improving Decisions About

Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Welzer, H. (2011)Mental infrastructures how growth entered the

world and our souls?Publication series on Ecology Vol. 14. Berlin:

Heinrich Bll Foundation. Available at: http://www.boell.de/publica-

tions/publications-mental-infrastructures-12600.html

Whitmarsh, L., ONeill, S. & Lorenzoni, I. (2011) Climate change or

social change? Debate within, amongst, and beyond disciplines: Com-

mentary on Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories of

social change. Environment and Planning A. 43:258-261.

Wilson, C. & Chatterton, . (2011) Multiple models to inform cli-

mate change policy: a pragmatic response to the `beyond the ABC

debate. Environment and Planning A. 43: 2781-2787.

UK Cabinet Office Behavioural Insights eam (2011) Behaviour

Change and Energy Use.London: Cabinet Office Behavioural Insightseam. Available at: http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/

resources/behaviour-change-and-energy-use.pdf

Unilever (2011)Inspiring Sustainable Living: Experts insights into

consumer behaviour & Unilevers five levers for change. London: Unile-

ver. Available at: http://www.unilever.com/images/slp_5-Levers-for-

Change_tcm13-276807_tcm13-284877.pdf


10

10


11/11

About Science for Environment PolicyScience for Environment Policy is a free news and information service from the European Commissions Directorate-General Environment,

which provides the latest environmental policy-relevant research findings.

Future Briefs are a new feature to the service, introduced in 2011, which provide expert forecasts of environmental policy issues on the horizon.

In addition to Future Briefs, the service also publishes a weekly News Alert and monthly Tematic Issues, which are delivered by email to

subscribers and provide accessible summaries of key scientific studies.

Subscribe to Science for Environment Policys News AlertKeep up-to-date with the latest quality environmental research for evidence-based policy by subscribing to the free weekly News Alert. Send

your subscription request to: [email protected] sign up online at:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/index_en.htm

Tis Future Brief is edited by the Science Communication Unit, the University of the West of England (UWE), Bristol.

Email: [email protected]

Image credits:Page 2: @istockphoto.com/Mark Weiss Photography. Page 4:Fig 1: Model of pro-environmental behaviour. Adapted from

Kollmuss, A. & Agyeman, J. (2002) Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro- environmental

behavior? Environmental Education Research8:3, 239-260. Page 5: Fig 2: Changing behaviour through policy making/Defra (2005) Securing

the Future: delivering UK Sustainable Development Strategy. Downloadable from http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb10589-

securing-the-future-050307 Open Government Licence: pdf http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/


The contents and views included in Science for

Environment Policy are based on independent

research and do not necessarily reflect the position

of the European Commission.

11

Green Behaviour

Documents

Transcript of Green Behaviour